In January of this year, I was invited by the then Economic Secretary to the Treasury, Ed Balls, to lead an independent review on behalf of the Government, on how a national system of generic financial advice (GFA) might work in practice.

"Generic financial advice" means essentially, an information and guidance service, available to the general public, to help answer their questions on personal finance matters, and to help them build the necessary skills to avoid financial crisis and take the right steps in terms of budgeting and making financial provision for the future.

Building the level of financial capability in the UK is of vital importance. Our work on the Review so far has brought together evidence outlining a number of financial issues affecting people in the UK including the problem of consumer debt levels, lack of life insurance and other income protection, and a lack of financial provision for the future in terms of life events such as retirement or having a baby.

Improving the financial education of the population will be of considerable benefit to people and their families, and as a result will also be of benefit to the Government and to the financial services sector including Scotland's banks, life assurers and asset managers.

Last week, I published the interim report of the review, with the aim of sharing the thinking of the review team so far, early thoughts on what the service might look like, and highlighting areas where we would welcome further debate.

Our cost benefit analysis suggests the benefits of building a national service would outweigh costs by 3.5 to one.

We estimate that the costs of building and running a scheme could range from £40-80million, depending on the eventual mix of web, phone and face-to-face delivery channels. We believe the cost of running a service should be met equally by Government and the financial services industry.

Our analysis shows that every adult, at some point in their lives, will benefit from GFA, especially at key life stages. The intention is for a service to be available to all, but through marketing and design will engage with those who could benefit the most from GFA.

Our research has identified a group of around 19 million people who could benefit the most from the service, including around 7.5 million people found to be most vulnerable to the consequences of poor financial decisions.

The service must be seen by users as impartial and on their side. It is a service which gives basic guidance and information, helping them understand the jargon of the financial services industry and, where appropriate, signposting them to the commercial advice sector, existing crisis management services or specialist information services for example on tax and government benefits.

It would stop short of making specific product recommendations and would not overlap with the regulated advisory sector.

What will the service look like in practice? One thing is certain - I will not be recommending that the service is called "generic financial advice" as the term is not widely understood.

We will be suggesting other names. Clearly, managing demand for the new service will be fundamental to its success.

A successful marketing strategy will be twofold - firstly getting people to approach and use the service in the first place, and then making sure that people take the necessary action afterwards.

I believe that a partnership approach, building a service that provides information and guidance in advance of a crisis event will help bridge the gap between existing services such as those run by The Pensions Advisory Service, National Debtline and Citizens Advice, and will be most effective.

In March, I invited groups and individuals with practical experience in running advice services on diverse subjects to share their experience. We've analysed this evidence and we are currently testing some of the key variables through two pilot schemes.

I visited one of these schemes last week in the North-west of England. It was fascinating to listen in on some of the calls that were coming into the service from real consumers, covering a range of different issues - from questions about APR levels and debt, through to where to shop around for life assurance.

So what are the next steps in the Review process? In addition to monitoring the pilot schemes and analysing the findings, we are seeking to answer other important questions such as the different models for the funding and governance of the national approach, before drawing together final recommendations in the New Year.

In the meantime, we are keen to hear feedback from all stakeholders on the review findings so far. In particular on the key areas of the best way to engage with consumers, the boundary with regulated advice, the funding model - and the best description for the service.

I strongly believe that a national system of financial information and guidance can deliver considerable benefits for consumers, the Government and the industry and look forward to developing the Review further in the months ahead.

'Our research has identified a group of around 19 million people who could benefit from the service'

'Gfa helps to answer public questions on personal finance and to help build skills to avoid financial crisis'